My friend asked me a question the other day. On Loose Women there was a debate over a man
on benefits who had spent £250 on a spot the ball competition and won, both the
cash prize and an expensive car. Apparently the debate was whether he should
give back the money or not? I’m so out of touch with popular opinion that I
couldn't even understand the question I was being asked. I was confused and
then angry when my friend told me that the entire panel and most of the
audience felt that this man should not have been able to have this prize.
I understand that by winning a large cash prize the man was
no longer eligible for benefits and that is only fair, but I couldn't understand
why he shouldn't be able to enter a competition or win. Apparently, it was felt
that he shouldn't have been able to enter, because he was on benefits. Since
the panel and all those virtuous audience members were working to fund his
benefits they felt they could tell him how he could spend his benefits money.
I would like to come out here as a benefit claimant. I claim
a certain amount of benefits because of my disability – some ESA and some DLA –
but I also have a small pension. My pension comes from my late husband’s job at
the Open University and is just enough to mean I pay income tax. I pay income
tax at about the same rate that I get ESA. They offset each other. So, I guess I’m
in a very unique position. I claim benefits and
I pay tax. I just wondered when it was that benefit claimants lost all their
rights? We seem to have come to a place where admitting to claiming money from
the state, even if you are entitled to claim and legitimately disabled, is a
dangerous thing. On Saturday my friend
and I were in a local department store, indulging in some retail therapy after
some nasty spine injections. We were asked at the counter if we wanted a
premier card for the store; a new credit and loyalty card they’d brought in. We
politely declined and explained we were just indulging after clearing out the
wardrobe on Ebay. They still pushed the point until we explained we didn't
think we had enough income to qualify. She asked if we were on benefits and my
friend actually hesitated before replying, because she didn't want to be
judged. This is where the recent government and media rhetoric about benefits
has gone too far.
If I get benefits does that mean someone else can judge me
or tell me how to spend them? Yes, there are a certain amount of fraudsters out
there, but the way the recession has been blamed on people like me is
disgusting. The proportion of the welfare budget spent on disability benefits is
small compared to pensions and the proportion of benefit fraud is also smaller
than you would think. Last year I saw a headline in the Express that almost
made my foam at the mouth: ‘Disability claimants given brand new BMWs’. Anyone who understands the Motability scheme
knows that nobody is given anything;
the DLA claimant pays a deposit and then surrenders their monthly benefit in
order to hire a car along with insurance and maintenance. Sometimes the deposit
is as much as £2000 for certain cars and I’m sure the BMW would have required
this sort of deposit. What people don’t
know is that in order to have a lot of modifications such as hand controls, or
wheelchair positions for driving, the claimant has to come up with even more
money or wait for an application to go through the Motability charity.
Nothing comes for free where disability is concerned. My
husband was given wheelchair vouchers
totalling £600, when every wheelchair ever needed cost over £1000. He tried to
work as long as possible so despite having a long list of drug requirements he
was ineligible for free prescriptions as he didn’t claim a means tested benefit
and had MS which isn't an exempt condition where prescriptions are concerned.
When he gave up work because he was too sick to carry on, and got a pension
worth half his monthly salary he was suddenly slammed with a care bill for over
£700 per month; earned wages were exempt from care calculations, but pensions
were fair game. When people talk to me about equipment, cars and money being given it is open season as far as I’m concerned
– out comes the soap box and off I go!
In my opinion, people on benefits do not have to answer to
anybody when spending their money. I don’t expect anyone to answer to me on how
they spend their money. Yes of course there is the debate over people spending
money on cigarettes, or drink when their children are being neglected but
surely the issue there is child abuse or neglect not how they spend their money?
Are we coming to the point where instead of benefits people will be given
tokens so they have to spend them in certain stores? They would be banned from
using them on things other ‘work hard and get on’ people find objectionable.
This, for me, would be leaving the way open to those who object to disabled
people living independently (how would we control their spending or the way
they live?), driving cars that look like everyone else’s (surely they should
all have invacars because they’re cheap and identifiable), and even having
children (how will they look after them and what if they pass on their
disability cooties?). I might object to the fact that the Queen hurried back
from her duties to put some money on the Derby – what if she did win and should
she give back her winnings considering she is funded by the state?
I do not defend people being on benefits for a lifestyle
choice, but I’m not sure that there are many of those people out there,
certainly not as many as the newspapers would have us believe. Even as I write
this there has been another advert for a series on Channel 5 with the voice
over - ‘welcome to the full-time job of living off the state’. We need to see
this for what it is. Propaganda and TV producers wanting to create controversy
and ratings; if they can get their program debated on The Wright Stuff
tomorrow morning so much the better. Not all of us have the chances or the
talent of some of the presenters on such shows as this and Loose Women
mentioned earlier. I want people to think beyond the headlines and learn what
it really is like to live on benefits. The man in the original story may well
have been a gambling addict in which case he got lucky, this time. He might
have decided to spend a week’s money on the competition because he was so sure
he had the correct place and felt he could live on beans for a week. In the
end, for me, it was his choice and his win. When we start taking away people’s
choices we have become a society I don’t want to live in.